Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (38)
- Book (23)
- Article (18)
- Part of a Book (12)
- Public lecture (12)
- Contribution to online periodical (8)
- Conference Proceeding (7)
- Other (7)
- Contribution to a Periodical (5)
- Doctoral Thesis (5)
Language
- English (140) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (140) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (140)
Keywords
- EMRK (4)
- European Convention on Human Rights (4)
- GfHf-Jahrestagung 2018 (4)
- Deutschland (3)
- Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention (3)
- Exportkontrolle (3)
- Germany (3)
- Technologie (3)
- export control (3)
- ECHR (2)
- EU-Beitritt (2)
- Public Administration (2)
- Rechtswissenschaften (2)
- Rüstungsbegrenzung (2)
- Unionsrecht (2)
- Völkerrecht (2)
- Youth-Check (2)
- human rights (2)
- international law (2)
- Abgeordneter (1)
- Administrative Styles (1)
- Amtsdeutsch (1)
- Arbeitsmarkt (1)
- Ausbildung (1)
- Beitritt (1)
- Bescheide (1)
- Bilanzierungsfähigkeit (1)
- Botswana (1)
- CJEU (1)
- Change Management (1)
- Civil Service (1)
- Civil service (1)
- Covid-19 (1)
- Crisis Governance (1)
- Crisis reaction (1)
- Deutsche Rentenversicherung (1)
- Deutschland / Bundestag (1)
- EU law (1)
- EU-Accession (1)
- EU-Charter (1)
- EU-accession (1)
- Europarat (1)
- European Directives (1)
- European Integration (1)
- European Public Prosecutor's Office (1)
- European Union (1)
- European arrest warrant (1)
- Europeanization (1)
- Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft (1)
- Europäische Union (1)
- Europäische Union / Parlament (1)
- Europäisierung des Verwaltungsrechts (1)
- Experiment (1)
- Experiments (1)
- Fair Trial (1)
- Franco-German partnership (1)
- Gemeindeverwaltung (1)
- Gesundheitswesen (1)
- GfHf-Jahrestagung2018 (1)
- Grundrechte (1)
- Grundrechtliche Natur von Rechten (1)
- Gute Verwaltung (1)
- Human Resource Management (1)
- Immigration policy (1)
- Indonesien (1)
- Informal arenas (1)
- Informality (1)
- International Conference (1)
- Italien (1)
- Korruption (1)
- Krankenhausfinanzierung (1)
- Lobbyismus (1)
- Menschenrecht (1)
- Multi-level governance (1)
- Multilateralismus (1)
- Parteienfinanzierung (1)
- Personalverwaltung (1)
- Procedural Rights (1)
- Professional Training (1)
- Protokoll Nr. 16 (1)
- Public administration (1)
- Public employment (1)
- Public service (1)
- Rechtsstaat (1)
- Refugee crisis (1)
- Rentenbescheid (1)
- Risikoanalyse (1)
- Uganda (1)
- VR China (1)
- Verwaltung , (1)
- Verwaltungsdienst (1)
- Verwaltungssprache (1)
- Vocational Education (1)
- Wassenaar Arrangement (1)
- administrative reform (1)
- arms control (1)
- automated decision-making (1)
- automatisierte Entscheidungen (1)
- cyberweapons (1)
- decentralization (1)
- dual-use (1)
- duality of norms (1)
- firm performance (1)
- integrated water resources management (IWRM) (1)
- intrusion tools (1)
- legal clarity (1)
- legal decision-making (1)
- management instruments (1)
- multilateralism (1)
- public participation (1)
- public private partnerships (PPPs) (1)
- publicly provided goods (1)
- risk assessment (1)
- unilateral declaration (1)
- water management (1)
- wholistic approach (1)
- Öffentlicher Dienst (1)
Institute
- Lehrstuhl für Volkswirtschaftslehre, insbesondere Wirtschafts- und Verkehrspolitik (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Andreas Knorr) (16)
- Lehrstuhl für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsmanagement (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Hölscher) (10)
- Lehrstuhl für Sozialrecht und Verwaltungswissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Constanze Janda) (8)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere Europarecht und Völkerrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Weiß) (7)
- Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftliche Staatswissenschaften, insbesondere Allgemeine Volkswirtschaftslehre und Finanzwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Gisela Färber) (5)
- Lehrstuhl für Politikwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Stephan Grohs) (4)
- Lehrstuhl für vergleichende Verwaltungswissenschaft und Policy-Analyse (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Bauer) (4)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, Staatslehre und Rechtsvergleichung (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Karl-Peter Sommermann) (4)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere deutsches und europäisches Verwaltungsrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Ulrich Stelkens) (4)
- Seniorprofessur für Verwaltungswissenschaft, Politik und Recht im Bereich von Umwelt und Energie (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bohne) (4)
Party Time in Brussels
(2005)
This article outlines the his tory of several attempts to increase salaries and pensions of members of the German Bundestag in the early I990s. It shows the unethical tactics used by parliamentarians and the way in which public information was in part consciously designed to mislead. It is argued that Bundestag members tend to form a political cartel when decisions concerning their salaries and pensions are made. Similiar tendencies can be observed in all parliamentary decisions involving party finance, providing support for Katz and Mairs thesis that 'catch-all' parties are generally being replaced by 'cartel parties'. Having analysed the issues involved, the article calls for greater accountability and responsibility on the part of German politicians when their own personal advantage is at issue.
Vortrag auf einer Konferenz des American Institute for Contemporary German Studies am 24.6.1996 in Washington, D.C.
The European Commission presented, in its White Paper on the Future of Europe, scenarios on the future of the EU in 2025, which prompt the question as to their meaning for the future of EU administrative law. This article explores the implications of the scenarios for the future of EU executive rulemaking and its constitutional consequences. As some scenarios imply a more powerful political role of the Commission, and almost all expand the scope and usage of executive rulemaking, the executive power gains induce the need for more distinct constitutional guidelines for executive rulemaking and for strengthened parliamentary control, to preserve the institutional power balance between legislative and executive rulemaking. The analysis develops proposals insofar and demands respect for constitutional barriers already enshrined in EU primary law but not sufficiently addressed yet in institutional practice.
As WTO members increasingly invoke security exceptions and the first panel report insofar was issued in Russia-Traffic in Transit, the methodical and procedural preliminaries of their adjudication must be reassessed. The preliminaries pertain to justiciability and to the proper interpretive approach for their vague terms that seemingly imply considerable discretion to WTO members, all the more as general exceptions are subject to expansive interpretation. Reading security exceptions expansively appears not viable as they miss the usual safeguard against abuse (i.e. the chapeau of Arts XX GATT/XIV GATS). This lack of safeguards rather suggests caution in conceptualising them expansively, as do the systemic consequences of recent attempts to re-politicise security exceptions which run the risk of nullifying the concept of multilateral trade regulation altogether. Furthermore, the appropriate standards of review and proof must be explored which have to strike a balance between control and deference in national security.
The present contribution analyses the Opinion 1/17 of the CJEU on CETA, which, in a surprisingly uncritical view of conceivable conflicts between the competences of the CETA Investment Tribunal on the one hand and those of the CJEU on the other hand, did not raise any objections. In first reactions, this opinion was welcomed as an extension of the EU's room for manoeuvre in investment protection. The investment court system under CETA, however, is only compatible with EU law to a certain extent, which the Court made clear in the text of the opinion, and the restrictions are likely to confine the leeway for EU external contractual relations. Due to their fundamental importance, these restrictions, derived by the CJEU from the autonomy of the Union legal order form the core subject of this contribution. In what follows, the new emphasis in the CETA opinion on the external autonomy of Union law will be analyzed first (II). Subsequently, the considerations of the CJEU on the delimitation of its competences from those of the CETA Tribunal will be critically examined. The rather superficial analysis of the CJEU in the CETA opinion is in contrast to its approach in earlier decisions as it misjudges problems and therefore only superficially leads to a clear delimitation of competences (III.). An exploration of the last part of the CJEU's autonomy analysis will follow, in which the CJEU tries to respond to the criticism of regulatory chill (IV). Here, by referring to the unhindered operation of the EU institutions in accordance with their constitutional framework, the CJEU identifies the new restrictions for investment protection mechanisms just mentioned, which takes back the previous comprehensive affirmation of jurisdiction of the CETA Tribunal in one point and which raises many questions about its concrete significance, consequence, and scope of application.
Mixed agreements have been a preferred form of entering into international treaties chosen by the EU and its Member States, despite the complexities their usage implies. Recent attempts of the EU institutions to prefer the conclusion of EU only agreements to mixed agreements, as a consequence of the broad interpretation of EU exclusive trade competences by the CJEU in Opinion 2/15 are motivated by the hope for increased efficiency in EU treaty making. They, however, provoke criticism with regard to democratic legitimacy and the EU principle of conferral, which constrain the EU to adopt only those legal acts for which it is competent. As this criticism is particularly strong in Germany and led to constitutional challenges of EU only acts, the present contribution will explain the treatment of mixed agreements in the constitutional order of Germany and explore the constitutional challenges that EU only agreements pose to the German constitutional order. This discussion will thus show the German legal order’s continued preference for mixed agreements, in view of the jurisprudence of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). Those constitutional challenges are particularly topical in view of the most recent case law of the CJEU that stressed the political leeway of the EU Council to choose, when it comes to the negotiation and conclusion of EU agreements based on shard competences, between either an EU only agreement or a mixed agreement. This political leeway turns mixity into a facultative endeavour in the hands of the Council. Under the constitutional perceptions of the FCC, such type of facultative mixity meets with considerable constitutional concerns because it replaces what was formerly held obligatory mixity.
This chapter identifies the most pressing challenges for the EU multilaterally oriented trade policy due to the changing global context for international trade and investment, caused by the shift of the US towards unilateralism and protectionism and by the re-orientation of China´s exceptionalism towards becoming a more influential actor. It explores and assesses how EU trade policy copes with the new polarities and finally formulates proposals for the way forward for the EU multilateral trade policy. It will be shown that the current challenges are more fundamental in character and may last longer than currently anticipated. It will also highlight that maintaining unity in the EU determination of trade policy is of pivotal importance for addressing the challenges, which however might become more difficult.
After the invocation of security exceptions became more common, the first panel report ever on how to apply them has recently been issued in the Russia – Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit case. While this panel addressed the application of the security exception in a situation of threat to international peace and security, the question must be raised whether its approach also applies to the invocation of security exceptions for economic reasons. In this context, the present chapter focuses on the methodical preliminaries to applying security exceptions: Its application in WTO dispute settlement does not only prompt the question of the jurisdiction of WTO panels and the Appellate Body, but also pertains to the issues of standard of proof and standard of review. A related methodical issue concerns the feasibility of the expansive interpretive approach applied to the general exceptions to the security exception. Reading it in the same tune runs the risk of nullifying the concept of multilateral trade regulation altogether, even more so as the security exceptions miss the usual safeguard against abuse, i.e. the requirements of the general exceptions´ chapeau. The lack of such safety valve confirms that security exceptions are of a different character compared to other exceptions. This difference, however, may be difficult to maintain if security exceptions are also used to defend economic security interests. Finally, the application of security exceptions may - as debated with regard to other WTO exceptions - be subject to an inherent limitation against exterritorial application, which would restrain its scope of application in cases in which security measures against a third country intend to affect also the trade of WTO members, and could become relevant in assessing US sanctions against Iran.
he third biennial workshop in Comparative International Governmental Accounting Research was held in Speyer, Germany, on 1st and 2nd April 1996. It was, as the prior workshops in Bergen (1992) and Valencia (1994) devoted to presentations and indepth discussions of finalized, ongoing and planned research in governmental budgeting, accounting, financial reporting and auditing. Financial contributions of Arthur Anderson & Co, Stuttgart, BASF AG, Ludwigshafen/Rhein and SAP AG, Walldorf made the workshop possible.
Main objectives of the CIGAR workshops are
to provide a forum for discussions of new, innovative, unfinished research;
to interest young researchers in the field;
to provide incentives and opportunities for international collaborative research and thus
contribute to the theoretical foundations of international governmental accounting.</li>
The focus this time clearly was on contextual analysis of governmental accounting systems with the exception of the papers of James L.Chan (its subject is budgeting), Ulrich Cordes (its subject is a content analysis and comparison of national accounting and governmental accounting) and at least partly the one of Norvald Monsen (it emphasizes the historical perspective).
Assessing the generalizable results, the workshop reached a consensus that we needed a better balance in future between quantitative and qualitative research, but that more descriptive studies and more data were needed before statistical studies would be possible; analyses of pronouncements of standard-setting bodies, especially international ones, seemed important; and significant work was needed on the processes of innovation, within-country standard-setting (even when there was no overt standard-setter), transition (in the emerging democracies and developing countries) and reform-implementation.
I myself and I am sure, all the delegates, acknowledge the willingness of the presenters to provide papers although this was not a requirement. The discussions were extremely interesting and beneficial and I would like to thank all workshop participants for their contributions. Thanks are also due to the staff of the Postgraduate School of Administrative Sciences Speyer and the Research Institute for Public Administration, in particular to Siegrid Piork and Christine Ahlgrimm, for their assistance in planning and organizing the workshop and in preparing this volume.
Fiscal equalisation refers to attempts within a federal or at least significantly decentralised system of government to reduce fiscal disparities among subnational jurisdictions by using monetary transfers, either explicitly defined as equalisation transfers or linked to other types of grants or spending programs. At first glance, there might be considerable differences between the European countries in terms of organizing and financing local governments. However, a number of problems being faced are remarkably similar: Revenues available to local government should match their responsibilities and tax resources should be sufficient to enable them to keep pace with changes in fiscal needs. Since it could be difficult to maintain a good balance between evolving responsibilities and own local revenues, any fiscal imbalance raises the case for financial transfers between different tiers of government. This book presents a collection of essays which mainly concentrate on different systems of fiscal equalization at the local level in Europe. Features of the equalization system as well as their recent reforms are discussed. Showing the influence of progressing European integration.
This book has a collection of 30 pieces of research results of Chinese and German experts, scholars and government officials. They are catego-rized into four sections:
1. Introduction and analysis of the current situation of Sino-German ad-ministrative systems, such as experimental units of counties directly under the management of provincial governments in the progress of China's urbanization, comparison of the Sino-German intergovernmen-tal jurisdiction division, history of the German administrative regions and local finance of Germany etc.;
2. Sino-German challenges faced by the administrative systems, such as challenges of reform of counties directly under the management of provincial governments in China, urban-rural imbalance in the progress of modernization of Germany and impacts of population change on lo-cal administration management.;
3. Sino-German exploration and experience in administrative reform, such as experience and inspiration of the administrative hierarchy reform of Hainan, China, efficiency and expectation of strategies of “urban-rural integration” in Chengdu, China, inter-municipal cooperation in Germa-ny – design and limits of shared service, multilevel function refor-mation of Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany;
4. Sino-German strategies of administrative reforms under the financial crisis, such as influences of economic and financial crisis on German administration, strategies of China's urban-rural integration and opti-mization of longitudinal administrative levels under financial crisis, promotion of equivalence of public services with fiscal balance.
As the executive director or the Research Institute for Public Administration at the German Post-Graduate School of Administrative Sciences and host of the workshop "Regionalization below State-level in Germany and the United States" I would like to thank the President of the National Academy for Public Administration, R. Scott Fosler, for the fine and intensive cooperation which was the precondition for the good atmosphere and the fruitful scientific exchange during the conference.
I also want to thank the Regional Planning Association Rhein-Neckar, INFOBEST Kehl/Strasbourg and the Badische Stahlwerke AG - as destinations and hosts of our excursions they contributed to very useful insights. I am furthermore obliged to the Investitions- and Strukturbank Rheinland-Pfalz GmbH on whose invitation we were able to make our American guests familiar with the Pfälzer whine and cooking as well as to Mr. and Mrs. Siedentopf whose amiable reception at Godramstein was another highlight of our social activities.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Ann Mladinov and Natascha Füchtner. Their close trans-atlantic preparatory management, their organizational work and assistance to the participants guaranteed the smooth and successful proceeding of the conference.
Forces of globalisation and localisation are inducing national governments to shift many tasks upward to international organisations and similar organisations as well as downward to provincial and local governments. Mismatches between financing (revenue and expenditure capacities), policy and management competencies can give rise to accountability problems. Emerging “performance partnerships” between levels of government are a promising tool that could transform these agency relationships into contractual arrangements that reduce agency and co-ordination costs. The summary report as well as the case studies from different OECD Member countries identify different types of intergovernmental partnerships, analyse the weaknesses of their accountability management and point out solutions to strengthen accountability of intergovernmental partnerships.
All contributions examine the extent to which spatial aspects constitute a condition for successful governance in federal systems. Spatial developments influenced by the world wide trend of globalisation have far-reaching consequences for economic and fiscal policies. Several subjects are identified as the dominating future challenges for federal systems with regard to regional economic development and growth. Interpreting the experiences of several countries, the papers presented are dealing with the regional perspective of spatial externalities and public goods, challenges and problems of agglomerations, the regional incidence of public budgets, the concept of competitive federalism as well as the politics of urban change and metropolitan government. The final discussion deals with challenges of demographic change for the political and institutional structure of federal systems as well as the future demand and supply side of decentral public infrastructure.
untitled document
(2012)
The Competence Centre Youth-Check’s brought together different actors in the field of Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) for young people in Berlin on 09 May 2022 in the International Conference “Regulatory Impact Assessment for the Young Generation”. In this documentation the ComYC presents the results of the conference.